My, what crypic coding. I'm happy I don't have to maintain this code...

its still pretty difficult to understand for me, but i think i got your point. thank you for the reply, and once again congrats for your code.

hehe that's not assembly/machine code... that is just a char replacement table for rot13, but instead of defining it with bytes/chars which would make it bigger/obvious... i defined them using 64bit unsigned integers... i.e. each pair of hex digits correspond to a byte... hence why when i access it i cast the pointer to char* to access it as a regular char table.

either way it's possible to have machine code defined in an array and call it just like you would call a dynamic loaded function... i.e. with a function pointer pointing to the array. (normally this array have to be as local in the stack, because there's read/write/exec permissions for the stack, otherwise system specific functions would need to be called to set the exec privileges)

please, can you explain to me how you manage to create a program in c using exadecimal and binary stuff from assembly language? im so amazed

Just curious about how you define those weights?

Couldn't agree more, we aren't Math majors here.

I forgot about truncation (facepalm).

Great solution!

hehe i manually adjusted the precision to overcome rounding errors... i guess the -0.25 is a hack to make the answer fit

that's really clever, i'm not good at maths so i didnt know of the gamma function
i'm guessing this solution works on platforms that use 80 bit long doubles ?
what is the -0.25 for ?

added to the description, thanks :)

Description is not clever, Thanks for the pic, It helps me to understand the question, but anyway I solved this question by finding the pattern.

no, otherwise it would be pointless to have kata's marked with "mathematics", fundamentals are fundamentals concept in programming, and this kata was entirely based on a math principle (its solving a math problem).

Aren't mathematics fundamental?

My method was pretty possibly the most brute forcey you could go. I wrote an equation to find which numbers let you skip, but didn't condense it appropriately. Also, it doesn't always work. Once I finished, I resubmitted some odd 20 times to get lucky numbers.